bastet_cat_god

Can science resurrect the dead?

Can science resurrect the dead? — an article by eldras, the developer of the awesome, sprawling Quantum Archaeology website. Quantum Archaeology (QA) is the controversial science of resurrecting the dead, including their memories, by means of future science and technology.

See also eldras’ Quantum Archaeology page and background information.

Eldras reports that the QA pages are beginning to get lots of hits, and says “As an idea, QA seems to be gaining traction among those willing to look beyond the edges.” This is good, because the Quantum Archaeology idea can give everyone the hope to live again, and to meet loved ones again, in a bright and awesome cosmic future. This is the same hope offered by religions, but firmly based on science. If the QA meme becomes viral, the lives of billions of people will be better, they will be more optimist and energetic, less vulnerable to angst and despair, and more able to do good things here and now.

Can science resurrect the dead?

  • Micro Map of the past being created.
  • Quantum computers and new maths to calculate detailed histories and memories of everyone dead.
  • Face and body reconstructions a million years old already achieved: mind reconstructions coming.
  • 106 billion people to be resurrected within 40 years.

This paper, under construction, to be delivered for the 2013 Turing Church workshop. 5,000 words reading time 40 minutes.

(c~) text copyrights waived

“…information is incapable of being destroyed — that is the deepest physics I know.” Leonard Susskind.

ABSTRACT

Quantum Archaeology (QA) is the controversial science of resurrecting the dead including their memories. It assumes the universe is made of events and the laws that govern them, and seeks to make maps of brain/body states to the instant of death for everyone in history.

Anticipating process technologies due in 20 – 40 years, it involves construction of the Quantum Archaeology Grid to plot known events filling the gaps by cross-referencing heuristically within the laws of science. Specialist grids already exist waiting to be merged, including cosmic ones with trillions of moving evolution points. The result will be a mega-matrix good enough to describe and simulate the past. Quantum computers and super-recursive algorithms both in their infancy may allow vast calculation into the quantum world, and artificial intelligence has no upper limit to what it might do.

INTRODUCTION

Quantum Archaeology — (QA) was inspired by Russian born Asimov’s psychohistory, written during the second world war and after Einstein’s 1905 determinist¬¬ denouement of Brownian motion. This reactionary view — that everything is predictable using laws — must include decaying and cremating brains and their information conversions as we unify the quantum and classical worlds. Quantum archaeology takes its name from quantum computers expected to do near infinite calculations and are already operating in what William James in 1895 called parallel universes and will revolutionize information retrieval.

Scientific resurrection was a forgotten idea of the 19th century Russian cosmist movement, chased to oblivion by revolution. Awoken independently after the birth of the world wide web by Frank Tipler’s response to Ettinger’s cryonics, translations are easier and speculation about information recovery is increasing.+ A theory is emerging that the universe is a hologram^^^ — presumably formed by infinite branes in M Theory colliding at the big bang causing light to form and limit everything. This universe may therefore be made of light, and the laws of light — whether that involves motion or not — information at it’s very core.

QA was forged in discussions on Kurzweilai.net & other internet forums, producing howls of protests as death had been thought an irreversible state, perhaps having special properties and the first attempt was kicked off wikipedia as ‘original research’ and ‘not notable’. It will correct its doubtless many errors as it digs out its competence with coming spectacular forensic archaeology techniques. Accelerating science may make today’s lifeless archaeology seem primitive.

Quantum archaeology is a gold mine for the superdeterminist. It asserts a man is a mixture of events, existing solely by the laws of physics.> It is irrelevant if those laws are classical, relativistic or quantum, the laws of nature exist. What maters is finding techniques using them to achieve our aims of survival and resurrection.

In the quantum realm statistics are used as mechanics. Man’s composite patterns are swappable with identical ones by the principle of interchangeability. The composites are common to other men and other life and reduce , commonly to other biochemical and therefore other physical events which may be configured theoretically by deduction and experiment, then constructed. They are also convertible to information.

In an interactive system like the universe, things in one state are linked by immutable laws to all other things. QA’s conjecture is the whole of any person’s past is necessarily deducible with enough cross-referenced calculation done in symbolic maths, hypercomputation, or both, by the laws of science. From myriad starting points in spacetime, zillions of inevitable patterns are tested about a history until a correct description map is achieved. The horror was the size of sums which people intuitively dismissed as too big for philosophy, too big for science, and too big to calculate.

They are not too big to write down. Inventor of the set theory, Cantor, into arithmetic died in poverty in an insane asylum, postulating transfinite numbers with aleph orders of infinities. Predictive analytics may suggest a time when he will be revived. Mathematics now calculates infinite complexities — something seen as magic to the layman, using Cantorian set theory as the basis of computing, and describing infinite universes bubbled off infinite cosmic membranes.

Data is not random but in discoverable groups and shapes that cross-reference and repeat. Meaning — you can make shortcuts and confident retrodictions in space-time despite few events surviving.

The maths is like cryptologic with which Rejewski, successfully reverse-engineered Scherbius’ genius enigma machine using the theory of permutations and groups. He found correct scrambles from 150,000,000,000,000,000,000 combinations, allowing mathematicians to break encrypted messages in wartime. The statistics of complex systems through time can draw on work in dynamics like quantum turbulence
for to secure against climate catastrophe, we need mathematics so profound is it beyond the thoughts of men.

It is the size of the sums that is dazzling.

This is the mega problem resurrection and all deep archaeology faces. You could, for instance derive all possible peoples by simply permutes of all possible events. That vast calculation would include a map for resurrecting everyone who could have lived — then resurrect them all with coming robotics! But quantum archaeology is going to use innovative number elimination rules, natural deduction and proof calculus drawing on algorithmic probability and event histories to reduce these near infinite histories to the correct ones in the linear history that we know.

They reduce surprisingly quickly.

There are many objections to quantum archaeology, but these are mainly because it is just beginning and still has many unknowns. Some assumptions will turn out to be false, but the basic premise — that you can assemble the past from few things in the present using the laws of physics — looks unshakable.

Quantum archaeology is important enough to be a separate research field and ‘if there weren’t many unknowns it wouldn’t need to be researched’. Every part must be started on what is known. We can calculate what is coming by trending and looking at prototyping as well as what innovative research is being speculated in academic papers and futurist groups.

Computational archaeology, semiotics (it is possible to see the whole world as signs and symbols) and other disciplines build increasingly sophisticated maps of events good enough to construct growing parts of the past, and every failure is an opportunity for invention.

Incremental improvements are likely to produce maps good enough to run simulations past the 5 nanometres thought needed to plot individual brains (quantum levels are generally under 100 nm) — for any time in history. When that happens machine technology small enough for physical resurrection is likely to have arrived, and routine.revivals become a branch of medicine. Accelerating progress must lead generally to resurrection of the dead, or we will have failed to master very small numbers.

But it can also be specifically attempted. Quantum archaeology is drafted like Laplace’s demon, as retrodiction science, back-calculating events that must have been from those known in the present, deducing patiently by the laws of physics. Masses of the work can be done in classical physics in which human consciousness seems to reside and it may be that there is only one physics. However Quantum Archaeology accommodates the quantum (statistical) theory, which modifies classical physics in the world of the very small — just as Relativity modified Newtonian physics for the world of the very big. We are learning to manipulate quanta, and the effects must be unprecedented invention. In 2010 the first quantum machine was built.¬

This unleashing technology will be fantastic. Things thought impossible will be done routinely and things beyond imagination will be built enabling and accelerating one another. More than a trillion trillion trillion machines each more complex than anything man-made today, will fit inside an atom, and these intelligent invisibles will construct smaller, cleverer machines to achieve even more astonishing science as we head into superstring physics and enter other universes with different laws.

For resurrection of the dead we need not advance that much. Relevant sizes are mostly between one atom and one metre for the body and brain. This, coupled to simulable descriptions of local environment, are everything possible in a human mind. Nothing is irrelevant, nothing is left to chance, and nothing happens by spooky forces. No man is outside nature, and his most private thoughts are solely products of determinable biology, environment and the laws of physics. Memory is caused by neuron modification to internal and environmental stimuli. All will be revealed by patient analysis and detailed cross-referencing from myriad starting points in histories preserved in the Records.

Quantum archaeology anticipates fast advances in charting detailed event maps that are faithful and repeatable. Information gaps may be overcome by studying huge numbers of common timelines, filling in the blanks by eliminating the impossible and recording whatever remains as the fact.

We are already doing this with present and historical reconstructions.

The worst case scenario for quantum archaeology is that we plot and resurrect every possible person who has ever lived but have no idea which are the ‘real’ ones. This is extremely unlikely because the science of probability will eliminate impossible timelines, and it is possible the entire universe may be charted as a moving, reversible system, on computers that already have more variables than all stars and planets combined, as we learn the laws.

“I think that matter must have a separate reality independent of the measurements. That is, an electron has spin, location and so forth even when it is not being measured. I like to think that the moon is there even if I am not looking at it.” Albert Einstein originator of Relativity.

“All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force… We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter.” Max Planck, originator of Quantum Theory.

We could side step the fundamentals of quantum explanation in favour of ‘What can we do?’ ‘What can we achieve?’ In the case the physical universe cant be reversed, at least archaeology can calculate causally and probabilistically what parts of it necessarily were, for there are limits to the size of what is needed, and retrodiction may be so demonstrably accurate as to assert we have mapped the essence of any person including thoughts known solely to them.

Size doesn’t affect the idea, nor does distance to history, which assumes only that the world operates by laws, we can state enough of them at our size limits, and can back-calculate necessary events down to the relevant scale of human memory. This comes easily to futurists who are used to predictive and statistical inference calculations since Babbage forced the world’s ruling elite through the rigours of the Royal Statistical Society once world peace had freed vast money from 1815.

Using axiomatic logic and basic number theory, QA will draft a detailed, expanding four dimensional (moving) graph of history called the Quantum Archaeology Grid, anticipating hypercomputing, synthesis of data banks, and clever, vastly superior ways of manipulating — like super-recursive algorithms (which are expected to out-perform even quantum computers). We will reach 1 exaflop (a quadrillion floating-point calculations per second) of data manipulation on classical supercomputers, passing what is thought to be one human brain capacity in 2018-22, but it’s nothing to what’s coming.

Mathematics means you dont need brute calculation. Symbolic abstraction computes pretty well anything knowable. Maths is just short- cuts. Human memories are generally isometric. Although all neurons are unique they have evolved inevitably, and if you have calculated the environment and the biology like DNA, you are more than half way to describing the dead person. Memory reconstruction is repetition, reaction and environmental permutation, reduced by ascertainable and specific geographical location. The brain itself has only 300 million pattern recognition modules, of 100 neurons per module (How to Create a Mind Ray Kurzweil 2012). Human memory is not random but flows like rivers down the paths of least resistance, obeying the body’s hormonal goals to sensory input from given or calculable environments. The acceleration of science is forcing it’s method as processual archaeology.

Reconstructions might start with a prototype human. Maps would be linked by the laws of physics to maps a moment later. Dynamic and inevitable map trajectories would be plotted. Over them would be imposed other maps from complex databases, personalizing what the person must have been like, at first generally, then in such detail he would be indistinguishable from the real thing. At that point they would be the real thing! Just as RNA copies new cells in your body constantly, a copy of any deceased person would actually be them. All their thoughts, everything that made them them would be present, set down in equations, algorithms and countless sums and therefore backed-up. A reconfigured human being would necessarily hold descriptions in his brain of his tribal environment to help reconfigure others, and these can be simultaneously commenced in the present to describe the past as interaction.

This is living reconstruction.

Each piece of the quantum archaeology enables new pieces. But this wont be done at the rate of people on digs or in labs, but on intelligent machines working near light speed and with errors of much less than the one in a million which is today’s state of the art in DNA sequencing. Error checking of complex systems is integral to mathematics’ architecture and is well advanced.

Zillions of modifications by speeding computers configuring local data in classical and quantum physics would perfect chronicles and representations into finely detailed snapshots from conception to death. At that point a license to resurrect might be granted by a medical council. Then microrobots would begin reconstruction.

Things in local areas like books, or an internet which may be a large interactive book, are information node densities — clustering coefficients affecting other information pathways and other nodes, like heavy stars affecting gravity distribution in a universe. As we master large and quantum gravity, these may weight in so accurately it could be impossible for a single moment to escape statistical denouement. One advances like the climbing spider, one success builds conditions for the next, until the grid is weaved.

This is archaeology rising. Quantum means ‘the minimum amount of an entity’. Archaeology: ‘the recovery and analysis of human data’. Thus quantum archaeology is the recovery and analysis of the minimum amounts of data needed to describe anything human in history, including human brain cells and even private human events and thoughts, to be plotted as event points on the general quantum archaeology grid.

The points plotted are fixed relatively, but they have pasts and futures, forward and aft, and adjacencies. Together they give moving charts of a man’s life and memories. His whole body is not more than 1.8 X 10^27 molecules with its 7 X 10^27 atoms. Although these are vast numbers they are not infinite and size of calculations should be set aside when pondering the viability of quantum archaeology, for it is reasonable to assume maths in the future will get better.

It is easier than it first seems. The bulk of calculation is repetition, and early cosmology techniques enable seed programmes. No seed simulations have resulted in life, but the computing power has not been enough for brute force permutation yet; calculations are increasing as multiples of Moore’s Law and the advance of number equations.

Mathematics by arduous minds torturing the edge of abstraction will surely yield to greater intelligence amplification in machines. How fast the big calculators arrive is more than guesswork as constant trajectories have been watched for 50 years, and astonishing leaps have peppered history. By numbers of actioned patents, discoveries are speeding.

QA posits recovery and reconstruction of sufficient data to calculate the details of anyone dead — including their memories — to prepare a map of them — for technologies like micro robots to build to order when those arrive after the 2020′s.

Quantum robots are a form of micro robot based on Feynman’s idea, by Paul Benioff in 1982. David Deutsch at Oxford pioneered quantum computation to successfully push the science and it is now a major research industry.

Coming technologies like 3D printing seem to have no scale limits and may eventually be used routinely at quantum levels, nor be restricted to three dimensions. Non-living events, aeons past, and people who are events called ‘living’, are expected to be resurrected to full functionality, and general ones (of genres) have already been achieved. It is thought we will be able to resurrect a non-specific tribe of Neanderthals since completing their DNA in 2012. This is not yet a specific brain but it is easier to see that this may become possible as archaeology unearths the past by probability and causation to levels that seemed impossible one generation of 20 years ago.

Given enough machine complexity, future people may find simulating this universe is easy on a personal computer- including all its peoples to date. Despite our egos screaming otherwise, these resurrectees must be indistinguishable from the real thing under Ettinger’s maxims of identity. Once the quantum archaeological grid is drawn, any number of a specific dead person could be manufactured, a complete simulation of their consciousness from conception to death written down or run as a computer program, and would be demonstrably authentic at the point of revival. There are huge and growing record bases that can help, some reaching back millions of years.

As we reconstruct given histories they provide a platform to go back further, since each human mind is a library.

The processing power is already here for the surface work, the mathematics already in place, but sufficient technology not expected for 20-40 years. That is a wide time-frame in accelerating technology. The problems of resurrecting over 106 billion dead people since 50,000 B.C.E. into the modern world may look ridiculous, but in a few decades what is possible will have multiplied by many factors. As to housing, the universe is full of space, and dimension distortion in your own apartment may come. Some people say they dont want to be resurrected but this is the Lazarus Long Delusion explained later. When people cite possible problems after resurrecting, the essential idea has been understood and scientists should begin the work.

We are attempting to label all things manufactured by men as the Internet of Things which is slowly covering the globe. Bar codes are being put on items by description, and those descriptions may become specific enough to re-engineer any of them — including moving ones as 3D printers move into the home and connect to the internet. Things are progressively built by machine systems planning and designing them; which forces innovative mathematics and startlingly good model-driven software. At some stage voice commands to a portable device will be enough for most things to be assembled in front of you at speed, and objects once of great value will become disposable and recyclable. The wave may bring excellence enough in high technology for the manipulation of quantum archaeological data. Demand may get program makers to have ancient artifacts and people available to download as programs to your home assembler, subject only to payment and legality. If this seems science fantasy, its precursors are already being used and computing power is the main thing holding it back.

This paper highlights the accelerating progress of technologies and sciences, not only in archaeology and reconstructing the past, but generally, with advances like self-driving cars, printed body parts, quantum teleportation (transporting over distance, now done routinely) and invisibility cloaks.

It looks at the implications of quantum archaeology, the three main objections to it, and offers defeats. The objections are briefly:

1. Information is irrecoverably lost or there’s too much of it to make sense:

— defeat: — archaeology recovers information and by accelerating methods. QA is not attempting infinite recovery, but between the atom and the body, generally. One quantum computer is expected do more than all classical computers combined. All possible deceased’s memories could be calculated initially, and QA will reduce these to the few then the one by probability and causation. Ettinger (cryonically suspended) nearing ninety thought there might be a Law of Conservation of Information and nothing is lost in the universe, though his search hadn’t found it. Leonard Susskind, an originator of string theory states “information is incapable of being destroyed — that is the deepest physics I know” ^^^ (and Stephen Hawking conceded that information cannot be destroyed using multiverse theory).

2. Entropy says the universe is not reversible therefore no local part of the universe is reversible. When brains decay, part of their descriptions are lost as thermodynamic heat and there is no known way of retracing it.

— defeat — M Theory implies other universes: energy for reversal can be created or siphoned from the multiverse; local parts may therefore be reconfigurable because there will be enough energy to do it. The entire universe is debated as a simulation. If so, the universe is logically reversible for the burgeoning numbers of events in the present all trace to similar histories in the past: they are like branches of trees all tracing to common trunks. They are not unit events but classes of reversible laws with limits.

Further QA isn’t relying on total information reconstruction from surviving fragments but the construction of the quantum archaeology grid which sources events before, after and adjacent to a given person’s timeline and works by logically deduced reconfigurations. It isn’t seeking the actual particle that made the deceased’s brain, but multi-time pathways that made those particular brains inevitable.

3. Quantum Theory proves Cause & Effect are obsolete so we’ll never know the past.*

— defeat — The world can be described pretty much causally using Many Worlds Interpretation¬¬ and Einstein who could be called a superdeterminist could be right, causality underpins nature. The fact a brilliant probability science is giving astoundingly good predictions is a triumph for probability science not a refutation of determinism, which the MWI reinstates, dismissing probability cloud observer collapses by quantum decoherence. Even allowing quantum probability alone, closed and unobserved quantum systems are demonstrated to be both predictable and reversible. (See also 2012 Nobel Physics Prize”for ground-breaking experimental methods that enable measuring and manipulation of individual quantum systems”). Debate rages about how to capture the laws of the quantum realm, and camps traditionally oppose each other, some believing causation, existing, too complex and too quick for mankind. Nature has had infinite time for infinitely deep complexity predating our universe. Einstein was more hopeful of finding a way and dismissed quantum theory as a lack of perspective. Quantum Archaeology does NOT need to go infinitely small scale to complete its grid, and most quantum theory is irrelevant to it.

There is enough material to make quantum archaeology a separate research area for the pay-off is high. Any strong university that has social sciences, sciences and philosophy could attempt it.

As the quantum realm has yet to be thrashed out, this paper will argue the limits of science: that deceased Man is built by and therefore retrievable by its absolute laws: no-one and nothing may exist outside them. It will also attempt to argue that extropian resurrection is a greater more powerful philosophy, than the brute will of the Nietzschean and Marxist schools — both myopic following of Darwin — and QA must inevitably lead to recursive civilization on rising Kardashevian scales.

Heidegger’s assertion ‘death must be accepted in order to be free.’ is refuted by the extropian school. Death never was. Death is an illusion. There is no strict freedom since everything is bound by law. Higher degrees of mobility evolve as responses to the environment and the compatibility argument ends the conflict between free will and determinism:- they are different perspectives on a system that owns its qualian self. The quantum world may yield a wider explanation of surely wondrous complex causality but is in its infancy, and causality is on detention there! Human intelligence, as memory modification at ion speed, hasn’t yet (2013) been passed by artificial general systems good enough to fool a blind man playing Turing’s imitation game.

Massive life extension looks viable and resurrection theory is running after it. The mathematics and technologies needed are covalent. Cryonics is presently the best way of preserving organic data, and it would be foolish indeed not to use it, but comprehensive scanning technologies are sure to emerge eg from sonics, electromagnetics and internal mapping by nanobots. They will not be needed if QA is correct but it is a futurist and unproven idea until its researched, and no university department has dared include it.

CONCLUSION

For the poet-artist, death seems a joke by Nature trying to cage the truth of the imagination, since as a rule what can be imagined in detail can be built by engineers. Marvin Minsky’s mindless agents forming the society of mind are absolutely determined by science laws in what they must and cannot do: with sufficient understanding and computing their lives and histories may be absolutely retrodictable.

If we are to ‘extract the surrender of all supernaturalism and fixed dogma by superior perspicacity,’ futurists must stir the core humanity that objectivism mechanized out of the Industrial Revolution. QA is a snowball that has begun rolling, its argument annealed with visionary technology and invention. In the words of Victor Hugo, nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come. We are about to move from the Age of Information to the age of intelligent machines, and the speed of revolutions is accelerating. The conflict between Relativity and Quantum Theory is absurd:

“Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.” Ayn Rand.

Futurist extropian transhumanism is the foresighted raising a shield against aging, and cracking the long-brimming dam of the tomb.

Man is a being that has never died. Man is a being that never dies. Man is incapable of death. Man owns his future. The laws of science cannot be broken. You have been formed by eternity. You will always be. The dead will rise. We shall rise. We will rise in groups and we will rise indefinitely. Resurrection is certain. Immortality is certain. A man is intrinsically precious. You are intrinsically precious. Your cause is as valid as the universe. You, yourself are as valid as the universe for you, yourself are a law of universe.

With such bold maxims, questions about suffering and life’s meaning obliterate. Suffering is not only going to end, it is going to be reversed, because the human past is not fixed at death — as will be shown in another paper. Life’s meaning is faulty questioning because immortality is a basic state of the world. Transhuman Man is meaning as reaction viewed after the event, and His existence is the base state of the humanist Multiverse.

Extropian is the resurrecting hero at war with death and chaos.

Hopefully by the end of this paper it will be thought possible no man has irrecoverably died, individual human life is not philosophically pointless, private thoughts and actions — viewable from the future — now incurr moral duty by pragmatism — and the awful price of history was worth it.

What is coming will shortly be driven solely by the imagination as machine slaves take over labor, experiment and discovery. Man will be relatively free from drudgery as depth in philosophy as machinery — brings weak into strong and old into equality. Recursive continuance will keep us away from ‘the greatness which does not bow before children ‘(Gibran) where what is possible is everything that can be thought of. Resurrection must become another branch of medicine, a civil and human right.

As this paper reads, doubts will repeat that we can do the size of calculation necessary.

They are certainly vaster than anything mankind has attempted. But so are the coming machines and maths. We already juggle infinities. So long as we avoid catastrophe, it is surely certain — sooner or later — we will achieve an archaeology smaller than the present. The danger is we think other people’s view are inferior to our own because of a higher cause since that higher cause resurrects and reverses suffering. We have no such right: we become elitists before our own doom. Whether its philosophical foundations are correct or consistent, because raising the dead is the prize, quantum archaeology will proceed. To the horizon of history. To every man who has shivered or sweltered in the earth. To each suffering sentient under our stewardship of science past, and struggling in the present, this is the future:

We will bury our dead. We will freeze our dead. We will cremate our dead. Then we will resurrect our dead.

Where Prometheus stole fire from the gods, Extropian rips elemental meaning from technology and makes it think back to him. The gnomes of this renaissance have begun a world wide web of runaway technical explosions. Unexpected and profoundly difficult science must lie ahead in shortening time-steps, physically affirming the Law of Accelerating Returns — that technological change is exponential — with high existential risks. People born today wont need to die, and people dying today will resurrect tomorrow, in a better, kinder world, where scramble for abundant power would be pointless.

We now draw with ourselves an arrow through the Singularity. Instead of aim and unreachable star, we exist by trajectory and impetus. Self-generation and degrees of freedom are everything. There is no reified point ahead, only launch. We the subject, are ourselves the absolute inside an eternal multiverse — which is as far as men have have seen.

Expansion, love of life, abolition of limit — including every kind of death, unite us** and if this is mad, it is also brave because it demands constant self-belief, constant rechecking of scientific assumptions, deleting impossibles, zealously keeping improbables. Man is his own quest for the absolute and there are infinite possibilities. Courage and cooperation have brought homo sapiens sapiens to the top of the mountain whopping every meso species on earth that has come at him. Now Man is stalking death.

In the naked desert of machine logic the resurrecting power of imagination as technology that turned Victorian archaeologists Petrie and Carter into legends will make heros spring back to life and actual immortality. Definitions of dead and unborn will cease to exist. But the clamor for the old to guide us is still desperate.

‘Youth could win, but had not learned to keep, and was pitiably weak against age.’ (T.E. Lawrence).

Science is climbing, gasping, to another high plateau, with a formula for resurrection, and the message that the dead are not permanently dead, their sacrifices not personally futile, their individual histories just beginning, and the opening future is far beyond the dreams of dangerous men. It looks unbelievable. Until you study it.

But Man is chained to fear of death until the first resurrections come, and Quantum Archaeology, fragile and embryonic, is regarded as heresy — or worse — is unknown. It is unthought of by nature: fearless technology bringing recursive civilization. It is revolution, with no obvious precedent and in direct contravention of biology. I can find no case of the dead resurrecting anywhere nature and quantum archaeology- by any name- seems blasphemy against the darkest veil ever built.

The dead will rise. Man is the warden of the world. Man is the womb of intelligence. ‘Man is the measure of all things’.”” Man is heroic will rising from the scattered dusts. All is not vanity and vexation of spirit, but architecture, assembly, form and reach.

In the ascendant of time, Man calls on the wizardry of science, draws his aspects with obsessive detail, to build a species natal chart and plot the histories, meticulously tapastrying together smallest relevant parts with the near mystical synastry of information physics, to regale his pasts — collective and individual — to gather them — to set them down — to preserve them, and so answers his own dying pleas with mathematics as machinery metabolizing the past.

For the archaeologist — who does occasionally look forward — homo sapiens sapiens is passing to homo sapiens jugis: wise man continuing.

Notes:

+ John Archibald Wheeler talked of using a stone retrieved from Plato’s Academy being put into a machine and its acoustic memory being peeled back to reveal Plato talking to Aristotle. Jack Donovan a toy dealer at Nottinghill, London used to speculate that such a device was buildable after studying sound machines for decades.

* Quantum Theory a serious objection to Quantum Archaeology. If the quantum world is random, then nothing is predictable in it. However we are already making successful probabilistic predictions in the quantum world, and systems have already been built achieving reliable results. It is easy to see how people think information could be lost into such a world but it’s mysteries will surely fall to denouement as its laws are recorded. The moment prediction is viable we should attempt retrodiction, — both are available in closed quantum systems. The best position may be to just describe what is useful in the quantum and to delay explanations.

^ eg 1., The Pauli Exclusion Principle states no identical fermions may occupy the same quantum state at once.

eg 2., The Principle of Interchangeability states identical particles are absolutely interchangable, and this is likely to apply to many things in the quantum world.

¬ http://article.wn.com/view/2012/08/04/Tate_looking_for_breakthrough_season_with_Seahawks_2/.

2012
Quote 1: “We shouldn’t get freaked about having to do all the reconstruction at once. People think ‘resurrecting someone from 1,000 years ago ? No way- toooo complex’ but they could concede we MIGHT be able to reconstruct someone’s DNA from then using probabilities. From the DNA you can map out a clone…an identical body. Now you look for how the brain grew through their life to the moment of death. That can only be two ways…the DNA and the environment variables.At that point people say well OK you’ve got copies of them with no memories.But here’s where archaeology comes into its own. People’s brains are reactants to their world…only that. Most of the variables in that world are going to be the landscape and the other people/lifeforms….and you are already computer-generating all the other people from their DNA. The other records and those you configure like the geological record, the archaeological record, the biological record, the climate record etc will all synthesize with incredible definition. If anyone existed at pretty much anytime in human history they’re going to show up in these cross-referenced mappings — warts and all. People wrongly think that memories are mystical — somehow outside the range of possible archaeological reconstruction, but they’re physical entities same as bones …each is inevitable given the right variables. Note we’re not just looking at the decayed brain and trying to get back the information dissolved as radiant heat, but we’re coming at reassembly loads of different ways which facilitate each other on a quantum archaeology grid. I dont know how small we’ll get, but my hunch is into the quantum world, even though the ‘you’ stuff of the body/brain is between 5 nanometres and a one metre body. Dont get hung up on Quantum Theory because most of the archaeology wont refer to it…we aren’t chasing subatomic particles — nor trying to find the actual bit that’s disintegrated, but what must have been, by relating spacetime coordinates to each other in a meso world. It’s like joining up the dots or doing jigsaws, only certain bits will fit when juxtaposed, but on a mind-blowingly massive scale ”

Quote 2 :”The 2 big issues:
1) Our ego’s dont get all people are reconfigurable composites ;
2) Size of calculations needed is so massive people dont think when they could be done with future computers, they imagine in time present.”

Quote 3: “We’re taking everyone with us, the dying, the sick, the lost, the helpless. We’re not leaving anyone behind. We’re taking the dead with us, and that’s what makes quantum archaeology a revolution. It doesn’t matter if you’re dead and forgotten a million years ago, we’re coming back for you and making sure you get the benefits of technology and immortality….you dont have to believe it you can see it in the work archaeologists are already doing. Faces not seen for thousands and more years are already being reassembled. As technology speeds we’ll do the brains — everyone’s — it’s breathtaking what’s happening in maths & science… ”

> 1. Nobel Prize winning physicist Gerard ‘t Hooft has “deviating views on the physical interpretation of quantum theory”.[17] He believes that there should be a deterministic theory underlying quantum mechanics.[31] Using a toy model he has argued that such a theory could avoid the usual Bell inequality arguments that would disallow such a local hidden variable theory.”.wiki

and

> 2. On Superdeterminism: Gerard ‘t Hooft “…the only reasonable view on the laws of nature is that they determine everything that happens, uniquely. This insight is necessary if you want to understand what is going on in a quantum system, in particular when you have entangled particles. However, this does not imply that the future is “predictable” in any way. Nature itself is the fastest calculator there is, and no one will ever beat that, apart from making statistical statements. That’s what qm is.” (to me -2013). This argument on limits is argument from size of calculations. We can also assume we can describe the environment we live in by finding shortcuts to data aggregations and patterns that repeat. These are the laws of physics which will be delivered increasingly by coming accelerating intelligence. t’Hooft has attacked labeling in philosophy and seems to be arguing from set theory.

¬¬ See also The Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (wiki) that resolves the central paradoxes and is absolutely a determinist theory of Cause and Effect in the quantum realm, rejecting the weirdness of the observer effect in favour of quantum decoherence, a splitting of worlds.

“”Many Worlds Interpretaion removes the observer-dependent role in the quantum measurement process by replacing wavefunction collapse with quantum decoherence. Since the role of the observer lies at the heart of most if not all “quantum paradoxes,” this automatically resolves a number of problems; see for example Schrödinger’s cat thought-experiment, the EPR paradox, von Neumann’s “boundary problem” and even wave-particle duality. Quantum cosmology also becomes intelligible, since there is no need anymore for an observer outside of the universe.

The Many Worlds interpretation is a realist, deterministic, local theory, akin to classical physics (including the theory of relativity), at the expense of losing counterfactual definiteness. MWI achieves this by removing wavefunction collapse, which is indeterministic and non-local, from the deterministic and local equations of quantum theory.[49][50] (wiki)

** see Extropian Principles http://www.maxmore.com/extprn3.htm

^^^ view online: Leonard Susskind Standford: The World As A Hologram; and on Superdeterminism “I find QM so puzzling I dont know what to believe. I’d be surprised if SD is the answer. Then again, I’d probably be surprised by whatever the answer is.” (to me — 2013)
“” Protagorus

bastet_cat_god
Egyptian feline god (source: British Museum/Wikimedia Commons)

 

  • Mitchell Porter

    If you can create an emulation of a dead person, on the basis of preserved information about who they were, then you can also create a hundred or a million copies of that person, or you can create a copy modified to have memories of things that never actually happened. You can “resurrect” Sherlock Holmes.

    All this should make it clear that this sort of “resurrection” is not what people used to mean by the word – that is, the reappearance of the same single person who died once upon a time. In the scenario proposed here, the capacity to “resurrect” is merely a side effect of the capacity to create freshly minted persons with any combinations of traits and memories, whether or not this person ever existed before.

  • I sincerely hope you’re right. I have thought often on whether it would really be possible to recover every single memory of a given person and the task seems daunting to say the least. Especially for people who lived before there were any ways of recording information.
    I think the current generation has a much higher hope of being revived than the previous ones.

  • Giulio Prisco

    Welcome David! It makes sense to think that it will be easier to resurrect the dead if there is enough “easy to find” information, like the information available on the Internet, so resurrecting the current and future generations will be easier than resurrecting our grandfathers.

    But here we are talking of super technology able to find you in the past whenever and wherever you are, and fish you from the past via some unknown physics. If our descendants (or some other benevolent alien civilization) will be able to do that, they will be able to resurrect everyone.

    The task is, indeed, daunting to say the least, and I don’t think resurrection technology will be developed before hundreds or thousands of years. But subjectively, for us it will be a blink of an eye: we fall asleep dead, and wake up alive.

  • Giulio Prisco

    Mitchell, yes we have much more information about Sherlock Holmes (the information in the novels) than about most real persons alive in the 19th century in London.

    But I don’t think the information in the novels is rich, dense and textured enough to build a person. The copy-Sherlock would wake up with huge gaps in his memory and a poorly defined personality, unless we make up for the missing info with a lot of guesswork.

    Whereas, given QA time scanning technology, it would be possible to acquire all the information needed to create good copies of persons who were actually alive.

    However, you are certainly right, a civilization able to create persons from traces left in spacetime, retrieved with QA, would also be able to create persons ex-novo.

  • PhiGuy110

    If QA is even a possibility at some point in the future, one must confront the fact that it looks like the whole process was set-up to be discovered from the start. Religion has a big part to play here as the destiny of man looks ever more magnificent…and ever more fated. For if we do gain such a power, will we not have become as Gods ourselves? Are we ready to wield such power? By the time we can resurrect the dead…we probably will be unrecognizable to ourselves. The singularity is called the singularity for a reason, beyond it we cannot see.

  • Remember, space-time is a type of information storage media. This realization is called eternalism and is one of the the logical conclusions made through General Relativity. A space-time hypersphere also has a transcendent interaction mechanism with other “realms” made possible via Brane Cosmology. Resurrection in this light is not wishful thinking! It the logical outcome of cutting edge science. http://networkedblogs.com/lW82y

  • Should future technologies such as Quantum Archaeology make so-called resurrection possible there are certain philosophical objections against the process being considered to be true “resurrection.”

    In my view what is really being described is not resurrection at all, but the creation of a copy. This may be easily confused with “resurrection” where the original has been destroyed, as in the case of creating a copy of a dead person. There is no reason in principle however why the ‘original’ person would need to be deceased in order for the copy to be created and this is where the truth of the matter more clearly emerges-that far from “resurrecting” a person we are merely creating a copy – either at best a duplicate or at worst an approximation of an actual person, either living or dead. Imagine if you were copied whilst still alive. Would you consider the copy to be you? Or woud you consider the copy to be duplicate whilst you are the one an only original? Why would this be any different philosophically if you died 1 second before the duplicate was created? Or 1 week before? Or 1000 years before the duplicate were created? It’s still not resurrection At best it’s duplication/copying.

    For a very clear explanation of the implications of copying a person see the You Tube cartoon clip titled ‘To Be.’ If after watching this clip you still believe that creating a copy of a deceased person would be the same as resurrecting them then so be it- but I’ll bet you won’t feel quite as sure of yourself!

    The philosophical objections to QA resurrection may be even more formidable than the scientific/practical objections. Quite apart from the fact that random events based on probabilities are inherently uncertain and therefore can’t in principle be either predicted or calculated no matter how powerful quantum computers may become in the future.

    At this point the debate becomes reminiscent of the ancient religious debate regarding determinism vs free will and the frontiers of science become almost indistinguishable from religion. Even an all-powerful God, we are told, draws the line at interfering in free will. Even He, we are told, can’t determine human behaviour as ths woud negate free will. If a person’s entire history an be calculated in advance (or in retrospect) then this would imply there is no free will and our entire lives are determined by first causes. If we truly have free will then our decisons cannot be determined or predicted and therefore cannot be calculated and subsequently recreated. So if we an be so-called “resurrected” (ie. copied) via QA then this implies we truly have no free will. Whereas most people would probably say it’s our freedom to choose which make life worth living. Without free will we would be little more than puppets or mindless automatons doomed to live out a predetetmined history and I suggest we are so much more than that! We may only get one life and that may be the price we pay for free will.

  • Stephen Prentice

    Should future technologies such as Quantum Archaeology make so-called resurrection possible this raises various philosphical issues.

    Is what is being described truly “resurrection” or the creation of a copy where the original has been destroyed as in the case of creating a copy of a deceased person?

    What if we used the exact same process to copy a person whilst the original was still alive? Could we still consider the original to be “resurrected?” If not ehy not if exactly the same process had been followed to recreate te original? Would it make a difference to your answer if the original died 1 millisecond prior to the copy being created? Or 1 week before? Or 1000 years before the copy were created?

    What if 100 copies were made of the deceased person instead of 1. Would you still consider the original person to have been ‘resurrected?’ If not, why not?

    If a person’s entire mind including personal memories and motivations can be calculated using physics and equations then would this imply there is no free will because our entire lives are determined in advance? Does the possibility of being “resurrected” (ie. copied) via QA therefore impliy that free will is an illusion? If so then where is the “person” who we are

    I’m afraid I don’t have a the answers to such questions because I’m a pretty simple minded fellow and the people here are obviously much more knowledgeable and intelligent than I am so I am hoping someone here can enlighten me by answering these questions please? Surely answering these philosophical questions would be easy for a mind clever enough to understand in principle how resurrection via Quantum Archaeology might be achieved?

  • Bob Ettinger who began Cryonics has dealt with identity and multiple resurrection in Chapter 8 of The Prospect of Immortality (Frank Tipler responded in (The Physics of Immortality)
    viewable free http://www.cryonics.org/book1.html or html quote on page 4 of Quantum Archaeology Google site

    https://sites.google.com/site/quantumarchaeology4/

  • Amichai Reznik

    But, 106 billion people is kinda too much for our planet, don’t you think?
    I hope that by than we will colonize other planets so there will be room for everybody.

  • eldras

    The problems of resurrection should be seen as Amichai says in the context of colonization of planets, and other things.

    There is a tremendous surge happening in technologies, visibly accelerating discovery and manufacturing. Whole organizations that were once labor intensive are mechanizing, & we are researching for prototyping, systems that compile, experiment, invent and extrapolate science. As these combine with 3 dimensional assemblers like nanobots and later other micro like expected quantum robots, something like a much bigger Industrial Revolution will happen and very quickly. we disagree of when, but most think the future will be more clever than the past.

    Yesterday my friend Henry Markram has been granted 1 billion euros by the European Union, now the richest place on earth by GDP, to advance his Human Brain Project over the next 10 years. This reverse engineering of the brain might enable intelligence on supercomputers by the early 2020’s to be factored up eg by parallel processing.

    The world of the future where the dead will rise will be technologically advanced compared to our own. Because one innovation will affect another, it is hard to see how much will change, or what philosophical and psychological compass will be good enough for human kind to go through it, as we push into uncharted explorations.

    These speculations are founded on hard science and not just ideas.

  • eldras

    MODERATION
    apologies for any posts recently who’s submission got lost in cyberspace. That problem is corrected now and no slight was meant.

  • Alan Brooks

    This a great quote:

    “I am an old man now, and when I die and go to heaven there are two matters on which I hope for enlightenment. One is quantum thermodynamics, and the other is the turbulent motion of fluids. And about the former I am rather optimistic.”
    —Lamb

  • Religions and sciences may meet AB, but it wont be in the divine but the natural.
    Indefinite lifespans have begun. Men alive now will see longevities beyond imagination -Aubrey de Grey

    The dead shall surely rise for man is de-constructable into exchangeable components. To hold man is something more is to belie science and technology.

    If religion owns its office it must now reach beyond the Singularity, armed only by morality and cunning, not hoard and feed and sleep and know not me.

    Although the philosophy is hard, the calculation-engineering is a matter of fact.

  • Alan Brooks

    … “Religions and sciences may meet AB, but it wont be in the divine but the natural.”

    Agreed, eldras, merely wanted to stress Lamb’s quote is my favorite quote dealing with any & all matters relating to life beyond this Mortal Coil.

    Here’s one I made up:

    ‘I don’t want a burial plot at Forest Lawn,
    I want to plot life extension strategies instead.’

  • I’m glad you like it. Science seems to me to be coming to edge of what men can do and the batton must be taken by machines, although philosophy never reaches a conclusion like economists. I looked at both QT and QT for QA and concluded they were both subsets of computing. I haven’t examined heaven in this enlightenment yet.

    I will ask Lamb about his quote when he resurrects.

    We’ll have it soon knowing Ynduráin!

  • Alan Brooks

    “not hoard and feed and sleep and know not me.”

    Why, then it must be the End Times :)

  • :) Exactly True
    or a new beginning Ulysses!

    It little profits that an idle king,
    By this still hearth, among these barren crags,
    Match’d with an aged wife, I mete and dole
    Unequal laws unto a savage race,
    That hoard, and sleep, and feed, and know not me….
    -Tennyson

  • Alan Brooks

    But he also wrote “hush this cry of progress till a thousand years have past.”

    Oh well, we can’t take anyone at their word– only simpletons do.

  • Let it fall on Locksley Hall, with rain or hail, or fire or snow;
    For the mighty wind arises, roaring seaward, and I go.

    Other that that I have have no idea where you intend to wastepaper trust nor fidelity!

  • -I think QA is honest and watertight in as much as a conjecture can be that precedes scientific investigation.

    No-one’s word can be taken for anything in scientific method as a matter of process and method.

    But I have spelled out the process that must be assembled in the above and in other (one longer) papers online.

    The universe is governed by laws. All known laws are described by causality and probability and QA uses both retrodicting to events like moments of memory in William the Conqueror’s mind on 14th October 1066.

    And all required ones.

    This can involve constructing the Quantum Archaeological Grid (google) though there are other methods.

    No need to take anyone’s word for it. The required disciplines of stats. maths, archaeology and computing are available.

    The issue is one of size of calculation, and what is possible, by maths and computing (the two are inversely proportional), is incrrasing.

    By 2022 ibm have stated error mastery will be sufficient to achieve workable quantum computers (that is broadcast!)

    by 2027 at latest, by my reasoning, resurrection of the dead will be achievable become of the Law of Accelerating Returns (Double exponential growth of technology) and this also of course involves the convergence of technolgies.

    Assembly I h=judge will requite microrobotics. they are already in widespread use in research labs. I saw them in 2006 in US gvmt defence labs but their existence is not in doubt? see google

    So you’re left with theory of information or data.

    ‘Information is incapable of being destroyed’ (L Susskind (article above)

    The new ‘information physics’ (google) has birthed a Law of Conservation of Information.

    I couldn’t exist as any kind of philosopher if I allowed impulse opinion dominance over the patient rigor of Truth studies in discovery. The exercise would be one of ego and not reality!

    But ad hominems pros and cons are barred in argument, and everything in this idea is in public domain.

    Difficulties arise from the human ego which says it is unique, non-replicable, and already immortal, built in the image of the maker of the entire multiverse and that it and this maker have a special chosen relationship.

    THOSE are assertions to be taken with no testability!

    QA is open to testing and verification but its use is a a herald of a new pillar of transhumanist- extropian or futurist philosophy.

  • Nahum

    If this was achievable we would not have have so many unhappy people on our planet Earth today. If those that died woke up from their graves they would be happier and so would we. Knowing that they would no longer be in hell with the evil spirits that are bodiless and Belial too. If my family missed me and I was in hell this would have been quite a miracle being woken up from the dead,bringing my family joy and myself too knowing that I have been released from an eternal prison that the Author of Confusion is in.

  • Can I as in me be recreated as I am? Or is this resurrection just a creation of a perfect copy of me with my memories

  • A. Warner.

    It isn’t a philosophical or religious but a scientific one subject to testing.

  • What is this new world like? My own personal heaven, or just a better now?

  • eldras
  • Nupur Munshi

    Giulio Sir, I re-read this article and found many times the author feels that it is only 20 to 40 years for QA to materialize. eldras says I quote ‘by 2027 at latest, by my reasoning, resurrection of the dead will be achievable’ . You seem to be a bit cautious(and perhaps patient) and push the time a lot further. What do you think?
    Am I allowed to ask you to make the author a member of ‘India Awakens’ and give us some insight into QA.

  • Giulio Prisco

    I do push the time a lot further indeed. As a scientist, I have a good idea of what we know (a little) and what we don’t know (a lot). As an engineer, I can appreciate the practical challenges of quantum archaeology technology (really huge challenges, even if we knew the fundamental science required, which we don’t). So, I don’t imagine that we will develop quantum archaeology anytime soon. But why is that a problem? For those who die and are resurrected, only a subjective instant will pass. They will close their eyes in this world, and immediately open their eyes in a new world. Of course you can invite the author, but I don’t think he is on Facebook. Nice guy, I met him once in London face to face.